Discussion 2020 General Discussion / Help

[TH3 GR3YHOUND]

Hey, looking to start a draft league and wondering what the ideal number of teams is?
And by extension the best team setup?

Anyone find playing 12 or 22 players to be preferable?

We have a keeper league being run by BennyGan above that we're needing a couple of replacement teams for if you're interested, but looking for people who wanna play for the long haul across multiple seasons.

As for size, I personally prefer larger teams as it allows you to look for hidden gems in the draft pool which can be make or break. I think we played 5-7-1-5 with 10 teams and it was decent.

 

[Seymour Skinner]

Hey, looking to start a draft league and wondering what the ideal number of teams is?
And by extension the best team setup?

Anyone find playing 12 or 22 players to be preferable?

I play in a 12 team, 15 a side comp. 3-4-1-3(4).
Been doing it since draft started and haven't had any issues with it, even if someone forgets to do there team or ghostships for a couple weeks it doesn't cause too much damage to the ladder.

 

[nameless]

Thanks guys, I reckon we might have 8 teams.
So doing the full 22 players per team might be alright.

 

[DaveyBoy123]

AF now has a "Utility" player that can be used to cover any positional line. I wouldn't mind this in SC.

View attachment 810683

Just saw this myself. It took away the totally redundant R4 position. Tbh, I don't think it would change our SC teams much at all, but would give just a little more flexibility in rounds where things went arse up. Most people would still be picking a rookie DPP for this role, just like our current SC M11 would be.

 

[freddy mercury]

Hey guys and gals. Back again, ready to go.

Just wondering what are your golden rules for 2020?


I have two;

No KPF after picking Darling last year and Buddy previous years. Been burnt too many times.
No trading out premiums. Hurt me last year when I traded out Clayton Oliver and had to get him back in when he got cheaper.

 

[Jiska]

It might have been better not to Tweet at all

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Prediction Time

As usual at this time of year the Board is bullish on a couple of breakout players.

Who is going to be this years Callum Mills or Brad Crouch or Petracca or... You know all those guys who are primed to breakout and become a premo. Except they don't (and usually never will).

My thoughts:
Greenwood - too old, not fit enough, poor team, prioritise new draft picks over him for time on the ball. Heaps of reasons why he will not improve much if at all
English - maybe next year, very young for a ruck and still learning the trade
Brayshaw (Fre) - he tonned up once last year. In 22 games. And he's going to become a keeper?

I'm also a bit cautious on Houston and Dawson. Better picks than the guys above but we are dealing with small sample sizes of good games from 2019. And even if they break out you don't lose that much since you can start a proven premo for just 50-70k more like Laird or Sicily.

Keen to hear others views...

 

[Jiska]

Prediction Time

As usual at this time of year the Board is bullish on a couple of breakout players.

Who is going to be this years Callum Mills or Brad Crouch or Petracca or... You know all those guys who are primed to breakout and become a premo. Except they don't (and usually never will).

My thoughts:
Greenwood - too old, not fit enough, poor team, prioritise new draft picks over him for time on the ball. Heaps of reasons why he will not improve much if at all
English - maybe next year, very young for a ruck and still learning the trade
Brayshaw (Fre) - he tonned up once last year. In 22 games. And he's going to become a keeper?

I'm also a bit cautious on Houston and Dawson. Better picks than the guys above but we are dealing with small sample sizes of good games from 2019. And even if they break out you don't lose that much since you can start a proven premo for just 50-70k more like Laird or Sicily.

Keen to hear others views...

What if you have Greenwood, Houston AND Dawson but don't have 210k in the bank?

 

[Sydney Kicker]

What if you have Greenwood, Houston AND Dawson but don't have 210k in the bank?

Well you can always turn one into a rookie and then upgrade the other 2 to premos.
With Wines out for at least a few weeks I'm more comfortable with Houston now. Still think Greenwood is a poor pick though.

 

[Jiska]

Well you can always turn one into a rookie and then upgrade the other 2 to premos.
With Wines out for at least a few weeks I'm more comfortable with Houston now. Still think Greenwood is a poor pick though.

Changes your structure a bit though. Suppose it depends what rookies present themselves.

 

[magpienato]

This will be my first time doing a Supercoach Draft League and I just need some advice. What is the best way to use my picks? Should I dedicate each round to a certain position like 1st round MID, 2nd round DEF, 3rd round FWD etc.
or should I just take the best player available whenever my pick arrives.
Basically just asking how I should plan my draft, cheers.

 

[gutsroy]

Don’t know if this is the thread for it, but this bloke is pretty interesting.
Has the pedigree, by all reports.
Don’t agree with one or two of his arguments; but don’t have to, it’s all interesting reading either way.
It’s advice / philosophy via a series of tweets, basically.

 

[JDavey]

 

[LuvtheKangas]

^ Got about 6 minutes into it. Six minutes of my life I will never get back. With all due respect, it's rubbish.

 

[JDavey]

^ Got about 6 minutes into it. Six minutes of my life I will never get back. With all due respect, it's rubbish.

Why is it 'rubbish'? Or do you just not understand statistics?

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Why is it 'rubbish'? Or do you just not understand statistics?

The whole thing relies upon the estimated average score being correct. This has nothing to do with player ownership percentage.

I understand stats, though it's been a while. Those normal curves display kurtosis (maybe that's just an excel plotting outcome), which means the probability distribution is not standard normal, so you can't use the standard normal statistical measures.

But that's not my main point. Even assuming the quoted stats are close to correct, they provide no support for the argument on PODs / ownership percentage. The statistical outcomes are completely driven by the estimated average scores. And they're only observable in hindsight. Which means the issue remains the known one - to be successful, you need to pick players who will finish in the top 10 (or better) in their positions. Ownership percentages of these players - the ones you need - will tend to increase over the course of the season, so there's no chance of you being the only person holding a 95-average player, whilst 100,000+ coaches hold a different 95-average player.

 

[JDavey]

The whole thing relies upon the estimated average score being correct. This has nothing to do with player ownership percentage.

I understand stats, though it's been a while. Those normal curves display kurtosis (maybe that's just an excel plotting outcome), which means the probability distribution is not standard normal, so you can't use the standard normal statistical measures.

But that's not my main point. Even assuming the quoted stats are close to correct, they provide no support for the argument on PODs / ownership percentage. The statistical outcomes are completely driven by the estimated average scores. And they're only observable in hindsight. Which means the issue remains the known one - to be successful, you need to pick players who will finish in the top 10 (or better) in their positions. Ownership percentages of these players - the ones you need - will tend to increase over the course of the season, so there's no chance of you being the only person holding a 95-average player, whilst 100,000+ coaches hold a different 95-average player.

A couple things to unpick here...

1. At the start of the year this is exactly what happens - there are lots of good players that aren't highly owned that people miss out on (last year for example Boak, Hurn, Dunkley)

2. Over the course of the year you're trying to pick the players that will average the most from that round to the end of the year. There are lots of stretches where you shouldn't go after the player that's averaged in the top X at that point. For example lots of people traded in Jeremy Cameron while he was a top 6 forward and his ownership % kept going up - but he was a bad choice and they should've been trading in other players. Another example was when Gawn got injured - lots of people (including myself) jumped off the highly owned and better averaging Gawn for Goldy - this was a fantastic move, scored more points and made money.

Once again you're looking to find players who will average in the top X from that point to the end of the year at the best price - at no point does the ownership of a player change who those players are.

There is a CORRELATION with ownership and good players because MOST of the time its figured out but this isn't always the case and it is not CAUSAL.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

A couple things to unpick here...

1. At the start of the year this is exactly what happens - there are lots of good players that aren't highly owned that people miss out on (last year for example Boak, Hurn, Dunkley)

2. Over the course of the year you're trying to pick the players that will average the most from that round to the end of the year. There are lots of stretches where you shouldn't go after the player that's averaged in the top X at that point. For example lots of people traded in Jeremy Cameron while he was a top 6 forward and his ownership % kept going up - but he was a bad choice and they should've been trading in other players. Another example was when Gawn got injured - lots of people (including myself) jumped off the highly owned and better averaging Gawn for Goldy - this was a fantastic move, scored more points and made money.

Once again you're looking to find players who will average in the top X from that point to the end of the year at the best price - at no point does the ownership of a player change who those players are.

There is a CORRELATION with ownership and good players because MOST of the time its figured out but this isn't always the case and it is not CAUSAL.

Look, I'm reluctant to make this a to and fro, but you've gone off on a tangent here.

Both 1. and 2. require hindsight, pure and simple. For every Boak, Hurn and Dunkley (who was a rubbish pick until about Rd 6), there are around 10 players of low ownership who performed poorly. Kudos to those who had the right ones early, and of course they had high ownership % by the end of the season as many coaches assessed correctly (based on evidence that was not apparent pre-season) that they would continue to score well. This could be described as a causal relationship.

The video doesn't address any of this anyway.

 

[JDavey]

Look, I'm reluctant to make this a to and fro, but you've gone off on a tangent here.

Both 1. and 2. require hindsight, pure and simple. For every Boak, Hurn and Dunkley (who was a rubbish pick until about Rd 6), there are around 10 players of low ownership who performed poorly. Kudos to those who had the right ones early, and of course they had high ownership % by the end of the season as many coaches assessed correctly (based on evidence that was not apparent pre-season) that they would continue to score well. This could be described as a causal relationship.

The video doesn't address any of this anyway.

Sure the videos talking about if you predict a player to have a better average then another (all else being equal) you shouldn't pick the worse player just because its more highly owned. Being highly owned doesn't make a player 'less risky'. This also has nothing to do with hindsight which you keep talking about. It also says that if you expect two players to perform exactly the same you should pick the one thats less owned if you care about shooting for finishing #1, which is the opposite of what most people do (pick the highly owned player).

Once again just because someone is high ownership doesn't make them less risky.

Your whole criticism comes down to the fact that you cant know what someone will score ahead of time. It doesn't take a genius to figure out none of us can predict the future and instead you're basing your team on your predicted outcomes which is exactly what the video is talking about.

Repeat it again - A player having high ownership doesn't change those predicted outcomes or make them more or less risky.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Umm, OK, all good. I assume plenty of others will get more out of the video than I did.

 

[Ash1337]

At the moment I'm using the supercoach team filled with rookies n mid pricers to see how they perform the preseason games then swap the bad performing ones out for premos. I'm interested in a few players like swallow, Marcas Adams, Daw & blicavs

 

[carlton 68]

Probably been asked before but how do I delete my entry in a draft league I set up a league but now don't want it ?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Probably been asked before but how do I delete my entry in a draft league I set up a league but now don't want it ?

Would that operate the same as normal SC leagues ....when you join a 2nd league, you're given the option of leaving .....have done, but not in a Draft League

 

[GRUFFY]

Don’t know if this is the thread for it, but this bloke is pretty interesting.
Has the pedigree, by all reports.
Don’t agree with one or two of his arguments; but don’t have to, it’s all interesting reading either way.
It’s advice / philosophy via a series of tweets, basically.

Thanks gutsroy, some of his tweets are definitely worth reading.

 

[gutsroy]

Thanks gutsroy, some of his tweets are definitely worth reading.

Yeah, reckon it's really handy in the main.
Good concepts, straightforward, logical.
Nice work on your commandments, by the way, you summed it up beautifully